Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)

No, it was not Frank. In fairness to this person, I am not suggesting he was corrupt. I am simply outlining what happened. On the day the county council was to vote on that issue, I took the liberty of telephoning the mayor of the city of Karlsruhe. I asked him about the Thermoselect incinerator and what, if anything, was happening there, to which he replied it was closed. I asked him the reason it was closed to which he replied it was in breach of regulations because it was discharging more than it should into the environment. Those of us in County Louth were concerned about that and we voted against the regional waste management on those grounds. In terms of the credibility and integrity of the process, it had none. That is the reason people are concerned. I can understand the reason Councillor Lucinda Creighton is upset and concerned, as is her community in Ringsend about the proposed incinerator. I know what is going on and members of the community there have not been consulted. They do not feel part of the process and the part of it that is left for them to go through is not as easy, obvious, transparent and fair as it might appear.

In terms of that issue, protests are good, all fine and well and I attended one last Sunday, but they are not the answer. Mobilising the community is part of the answer, but the other part of it is to get people who have professional, academic qualifications to attend the oral hearing of the EPA and who can match, in every respect, the people whom they will meet there. Without such people and the necessary funds and if the fight is not at that level, one cannot win in this process.

I make it clear that the health and environmental aspects of the proposed incinerator for Ringsend will be left to the tender mercies of the EPA not to An Bord Pleanála. When one goes to an An Bord Pleanála hearing, one will see 20 or 30 professional consultants, as we found, from Indaver. On our side we had a much smaller number but we did our best. The key concerns people have about incineration relate to the health aspects of the process, the discharges and dioxins. Those concerns were not addressed by the EPA because the EPA does not have and did not have on its staff any medically qualified person to deal with those issues and refute with certainty the arguments we made. The EPA said that the World Health Organisation's website states that this process is fine and therefore it is, and it can happen. I put it to the EPA that what it ought to do is to bring consultants into the process. It has the power to do this and the people in Ringsend should note this and request the EPA to bring into the process medical professionals they nominate or to seek internationally acknowledged knowledgeable consultants to be brought into the process to take part in the decision making process and advise on the process. The EPA was so arrogant that it would not do that. It did not do that, and that is part of the problem.

For the honesty and integrity in the process and for the community that will carry this burden for the next 20 to 30 years, there is no final solution in terms of knowledge or satisfaction in the process in the manner in which it is structured. That is the reason people are up in arms, are concerned and the reason this process will not wash. I do not know the position of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who was mentioned, but he knows that people do not want the proposed plant. He is not here tonight to make his case against it, as he should if that is his view and if he represents his constituents. The reality is that until there is truth, integrity, openness and transparency about the process, it will not be acceptable.

We will debate the critical infrastructure Bill, some provisions of which I welcome. We tabled amendments to it which, I hope, will clarify many of these issues. However, if the community concerned is only to get grief as a result of engaging in this process and if it does not have its concerns addressed significantly and directly, it will never accept or be happy with this process. However, that is not to say that we should not deal with the waste issue. I accept that we must deal with it. We cannot forever bury our heads in the sand on that issue. However, if we deal with it, we must do so in an honest, open and fair way. Under this process, that is not happening.

In the case of the incinerator at Carranstown, the decision to site an incinerator there in an area that was zoned agricultural came out of the blue. It was not zoned for industrial development. Nobody could anticipate or expect that area would be a location in which one would find an incinerator. One would expect to find an incinerator in an major urban area or in the centre of an industrial zone, but that was not the case in this instance. In such waste management issues there must be certainty in terms of knowing where such plants will be sited and members of Government must accept responsibility for them. The Minister, Deputy McDowell, does not accept responsibility for this proposed incinerator yet he is part of the process. One cannot fool all one's constituents on issues such as this all the time. We need to have honesty in this matter. I am aware that Councillor Lucinda Creighton and members of her community are listening. The way to proceed is to protest, march and carry placards but if they do not have experts and expertise on the day and do not insist that the EPA does its job, they will not win this battle.

The motion is mischievous in giving credibility to a process that does not bring the health and environmental aspects to the front of the argument in a transparent and open way. The EPA has failed miserably in what it has done heretofore and will fail again. It is a sad case.

See this speech in context